#64: Creole and its Role in Haitian Society: Poincy replies to Vedrine

[Robert Corbett <bcorbett@netcom.com>]

From: Jean Poincy <caineve@idt.net>

What a defense!!! Definitely this is a great thing to segregate the
people according to what they speak. That sheds light on the language
issue regarding Ayiti. Rather than ironing out differences, getting rid
of all the inferiority complex regarding the language, some of us are
justifying the demarcation among the Ayitians who favor French and those
who favor Ayitian.

	Please help me! if a letter is published on the site of the Ayitian
Embassy to address the Ayitian Diaspora to join forces with the
government how can we even think of a target audience? 1) A target
audience would mean exclusion of those living abroad in majority who
don't know French. I doubt the minister meant it that way, what's
troublesome is Vedrine's logic in his attempt to defend what could be
just plain negligence. 2) A target audience would mean that those who
are aboard and do not know how to read well needless to say they don't
know French and are computer illiterate to access the web are excluded
from the invitation.

	The Ayitian Embassy is a representative of the Ayitian government in
the US isn't it? A government, a democratic one, is the voice of the
people isn't? A plain syllogism tells us that if the democratic
government represents the people; the Embassy represents the government;
therefore the Embassy represents the people. 

	If all Ayitians living abroad are considered an extension of the people
living in Ayiti to the point of having a ministry established for it, it
goes without saying that the Ayitian government is also their
representative; hence is the embassy. Unless we say they did not vote
and have no right in the government. Now according to the post, the
letter does not say some are considered and some are not. It is
addressed to all Ayitians living abroad. The invitation is an invitation
to all; how can it be to a target audience? I want to give Mr. Jean
Geneus the benefit of the doubt and say it was just negligence. Thinking
of it any other way like Vedrine does is just fuel for division. And I
doubt also that Vedrine meant that.

	The remainder questions that Vedrine instructs critics to ask have no
relevant meaning as we decipher the first one. I am not wasting my time
on them. His statement of qualified experts in English or Ayitian is
although not relevant neither deserves a comment. The experts are not
the one who whish to address the diaspora; they are mere receivers and
nothing says they would be interested in joining the governement, what
would make us think they would be interested in translating the message
so others could read it? I do think it is the duty of the authorities to
make their message accessible to those they want to reach. 

	I am sorry folks, I just have to check the rationale of what is being
said in regards to Ayiti. I think Max Blanchet's critic was right on the
money probably to underline the negligence. All and all, if such a
negligence occurs, I blame it on the linguists for reasons that I
underlined in my earlier post on this matter. I will withdraw my comment
if Vedrine comes up with a formula to show that all Ayitians Living
Abroad, the diaspora, can be perceived as a target audience different
from being all Ayitians living Abroad, and who and where are those who
are not a target audience. If Vedrine can do that with sound logic, I
will cease to beg to change the name of the language to Ayitian and
write Ayiti/Ayitian the way I do.

Ayiti has lived, lives and will live
Mozeb